Very large eruption on the Sun, Oct 04 13:00

reply to post by Deetermined


Don't confuse the micro with the macro, its not exactly the same forces involved on both scales, something the EU community wants to unify from what little I have absorbed from what they say.

Originally posted by Dalke07
reply to post by crazydaisy

 

X class solar flare can be very high but don't effect us very mach ..

Is not big percentage that full concentration of wind hit us, in the case sunspot facing Earth ..

You must think 3D to understood that % ..

edit on 4-10-2011 by Dalke07 because: (no reason given)

wait.what?

why won't X class effect us much? direction?

i don't get all this about %ages...

looks to me flares are categorized by their energy density at the 1 to 8 angstrom wavelength. Are you saying that its the type of energy (as in wavelength?) or the type of flare (as in class?) that matters?

is it energy amplitude or type that u speak of?

reply to post by Dalke07


i made a composite of two of ur sun images. are they from the same viewpoint?

Originally posted by Deetermined
emitting X-rays!

dox?

reply to post by galactix

No.
sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov...
stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

You also have the scaling very wrong.

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Don't confuse the micro with the macro, its not exactly the same forces involved on both scales

that's right. don't confuse small with large: got that?

what's important to keep in mind is charge/mass ratio. remember, gravity is the weakest force: needs lots of actual stuff to be strong.

the comets were very very dusty, NASA scientists were surprised by the tiny particle sizes.

tiny particles.
being acted upon by magnetic/electric forces.

accumulating mass:dissipating charge potentials.

interacting with Sol.

reply to post by demonseed


Obviously you don't know what kind of defense the Earth has against this event, It's able to shield itself from extreme temperatures from the sun. take for example Venus, we are told it's a 1000 Degrees F. under the Sulfuric acid clouds. This is BS, every planet is habitable. What Venus really is Earth-like conditions with a bunch of rain clouds up above with water cooling down the planet.

reply to post by Phage


so the SDO image come from earth and the other comes from stereo-a.

k.hmmm.

i'm curious tho, if the SDO image originates from earth, how is it that earth is IN the picture, and even more, how is Jupiter in the picture? It was behind earth from Sols perspective.

these questions based on this JPL model.

really? the scales off?
eagle eye there... whew : i was interested in the direction of that long spike emission that hung there for so long. Wasn't that the same direction that the sungrazer came from?

reply to post by galactix

Earth and Jupiter are not in the image from SDO.
There are circles which show the relative sizes of Earth and Jupiter though.

reply to post by Phage


lol.

i'm a fool... i thought the scale on the bottom was indicating postions.

/facepalm

reply to post by Phage


is comet diving footage we keep seeing from stereo a or b?

reply to post by galactix

reply to post by noah1111


Yea if you're going to say a space rock had a diameter bigger than the sun you don't know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by galactix
reply to post by Phage

 

is comet diving footage we keep seeing from stereo a or b?

from stereo Behind and soho

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by noah1111

 

Yea if you're going to say a space rock had a diameter bigger than the sun you don't know what you're talking about.

Ok. I may not know very much about astronomy, but I'm not a complete moron thinking the rock itself was larger than the sun. Grant you, I should have expressed myself a bit more clearer. What I meant was the energy released or coma; whatever it actually was, was larger than the diameter than the sun. Like I said to begin with, I may be wrong and I am not here to argue, just discuss.

I do know that there is much unknown about our Universe, and no one can state for fact that they know everything. I agree of course there are certain things that have been proven and their are a few here that are very smart and knowledgable in this field.

One such person I respect as far as knowledge is Phage. He comes out with the facts, not only with proof, but also without an attitude (unless of course unjustly provoked in which I don't blame him). The ironic part of the members here disrespecting Phage, is that they always say he always has an answer for everything when someone comes up with some doomsday garbage. But the truth is, after all those times, he is almost always proved right time and time again because we are still here and all the things he disproves are forgotten.

Everyone has different opinions; thats the beauty of our world!
But please people, please respect others opinions (of course as long as they aren't cussing you and shoving their facts down your throat). ATS is an awesome place that I myself am addicted to. I do not watch news on television. I get all my news here, of course with the source attached. When I talk of things to friends, they never know what I am talking about. I asked my daughters two days ago, who are in high school if the teacher talks about the protests and the girls say no and to make it worse they don't even know what I'm talking about.
Oy vey !

~ Noah

reply to post by Wh00pS


No I swear to you, maybe it was changed because it needed to be fixed and they made a mistake because that wasn't the picture that came up when I went to Magnetogram so that might be the confusion. Either way its fixed now and that's not important anymore so thanks for letting me know

reply to post by galactix


Tiny particles held together by gravity. All space born particles attract, thats how hydrogen atoms coalesce to form stars in the absence of anything else with mass, and as the mass grows so does the gravity of that mass, it snowballs from there.

Didn't you ever see that episode of Hawking's that starts with ball barrings evenly (as best as can be but we know perfect unity is impossible) spread on the floor, the two closest to each other coalesced, attracting the rest, and accumulative mass grows, under the increased gravity of the collective mass.

Electricity is a byproduct of mass, an effect, not a cause. Imperfect unity created our universe, if unity was perfect nothing detectable would exist.

Friction.

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by galactix

 

Tiny particles held together by gravity.

under the increased gravity of the collective mass.

Electricity is a byproduct of mass

Friction.

ah. my ATS opponent, you need to acquire a bit more knowledge before you start arguing Hawking's points for him.

from bottom to top:

Friction is totally not understood, maybe a bit more than gravity, but not much. Current edge theory says that it is an electrical interaction: electrical.

Electricity is not a byproduct of mass. Mass, Velocity, Heat, Electricity : are a byproduct of ENERGY. You do know who Einstein was , right?

Gravity is the weakest fundamental force (which about sums up all we know about it) and needs an enormous amount of mass before it becomes significant. Some force needs to initiate the gathering movement.

Tiny particles. charge/mass ratio. look it up. Meanwhile, the point was that IF comets we objects that acumulated mass, and if this mechanism where electrical, then the kinds of particles found on such a body would be really tiny, cuz that's when the charge has the most influence on the mass.

and lo and behold: when we go look to see, the comets are warm, dry, dark, extremely dusty weirdnesses.

reply to post by noah1111


If the coma of a meteor was wider than the sun, and visible, then the sun would essentially acquire enough hydrogen to burn for millions of years more.

This is not possible. Because essentially you would have enough water falling across the solar system to make it rain on every world and flood Earth many times over, making every planet in this solar system a water world.

It doesn't make you a moron. I makes you incredibly unaware of the science behind it.



In fact you can know a great deal of the universe from a simple slice. It's the same reason why a scooping of soup usually gives you most of the material that the rest of the soup is made of. Same rule goes for the universe. You can know what 99% of the universe is like from a single slither of it. The universe is not some vast mysterious thing. In fact is rather known pretty well, with most things figured out. But just as much as the person eating the soup doesn't know the exact molecular make up of the potato in their spoon, we don't know the exact make up of the stuff that makes up what we see. But we still know what it is.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by noah1111

 

If the coma of a meteor was wider than the sun, and visible, then the sun would essentially acquire enough hydrogen to burn for millions of years more.

It doesn't make you a moron. I makes you incredibly unaware of the science behind it.

In fact you can know a great deal of the universe from a simple slice.

Coma's do come in sizes larger than Sol. Ever heard of a concept called "density"? The fact that you don't know how to apply it with respect to stars and comet comas means that you are clearly "unaware of the science behind it"

dare i say it.....?

One of the single most profound mistakes in current science is the assumption that the universe is homogeneous. We assume that everything from a simple glass of water to the vast cosmos is essentially homogeneous, or constant average density. Science depends upon this assumption, cuz if this were NOT true , many of the equations that we use to describe the physical world be invalid.


The universe is clumpy. This fact changes many things.